Skip to comments.Evangelicals: Change of Heart toward Catholics
Posted on 07/29/2008 4:39:52 PM PDT by annalex
click here to read article
Thanks for the clarification.
The LCMS is the best of Catholicism and the best of Protestantism. It's Catholicism without the "made up stuff" and Protestantism without the non-creedal, anything goes, pseudo-Baptist, non-denominational, Emergent rubbish.
As for the Marian doctrines. As a Lutheran, you can hold to the perpetual virginity of Mary, and Luther himself leaned very close to Mary not committing any particular sin (but not free from Original Sin). In many European Synods, that is considered “in bounds”, and used to be in the ball park for what is now the LCMS until the decree on the Immaculate Conception of Mary (which was not a doctrine at the time of the Reformation). Some of the other Marian doctrines such as the Assumption were not thought of, as they were not very popular in Northern Europe at that time.
Of interest, Ordination can be considered a Sacrament according the Book of Concord (forgive me, I forgot the citation). And in fact some of the Scandinavian synods like the Finnish one have a valid Apostolic Succession (which most of the mid European countries can not have due to the 30 years war and the disruption it caused). However, this is not considered a Sacrament in the LCMS (though a Rite, which is at times very close to the RCC view of a Sacrament, much like Confirmation).
Got to go. My pregnant bride is calling!
Praise be to God. This is a very interesting and needed read.
I’ve only read up through the first 50 posts, but some of the best Prot/Cath posts I’ve read in a long time.
There is a deep spiritual need for all Christians, despite our diffeneces in doctrine, to come together for three reasons:
1. Christ would want us together, despite differences, standing in harmony together as Christian brothers and sisters.
2. Christ would want us to fight the strong pervasive secular sentiment against Life, and indeed God Himself.
3. God is Light, Truth, and Good. Our world has a lot of darkness, deceit, and evil. I’m not talking about social gospel, but the Full Gospel of Jesus Christ. What we Christians know is Christ’s real Mission.
I hope that we can make distinctions between our doctrinal combat, where we each believe we are right with God, and feel compelled to defend and persuade; and our overall rightness in walking in Christ, together against literal Satanic evil that is enveloping the souls of our nation and world.
It's still in the confessions because Luther and the early Reformers were all ex-Catholic monks and such, and didn't let go of their upbringing easily. But scripture plainly shows that we confess our sins to God, and he is just, and will forgive us. In fact, they use one of the Psalms (see what you quoted) to support the stance that one cannot enumerate each and every sin. It's this part of Catholicism that causes such terrible guilt in most Catholics. We live by grace, we are justified by Christ. We don't live under sin any longer.
What drove Luther from the church was that he could not understand how one could be forgiven and yet still feel such constant, oppressive guilt. He was going to Confession so many times a day that the priest acting as his confessor once said to him, "Brother Martin, it is not necessary for you to confess every fart." It was this that made him turn to the scriptures and find there the simple message - we are saved by grace, through faith, not by how good or bad we behave - we cannot save ourselves through trying to be "good enough" - we can never be good enough. And before you lob out the antinomian argument, I suggest you read the Lutheran Confessions and the history of Luther's argument, because you can find all the details there that I don't have time or energy to even begin to start reiterating here. But Luther knew that "even while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
Brothers and sisters argue, sometimes heatedly, but they still love each other. I will argue points of doctrine no end, but I will never suggest that a Catholic is any less Christian than I consider myself to be. People who say silly things like "Catholics are not Christian", are simply fools. Heaven is not filled with only Catholics, or only Lutherans, or only Baptists, or only...(but I'm pretty sure there won't be many Episcopalians there...)
That is a sin of presumption: refusal to believe in sacramental absolution. Related to that is apparent Luther's scrupulosity. Should every compulsive sinner start his own church, or was Luther somehow special?
I meant ordering as to mean compiling. Quite a bit is here, though I will have to dig through my stacks to find it again, The rest will largely come from a friend's library in Chicago. Sources will be attributed, naturally.
As far as what I have had to this point, I suspect you refer to "Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle Ages and later"by David Plaisted, which I posted some little while ago. If you can offer a reasonable refutation other than "it's anti-Catholic", you are welcome to. With the exception of his rather presumptuous extended extrapolation wrt the Waldensians, it is a rather good piece, and is attributed for your perusal.
Precisely why the citation from Psalm 19 is in the Augsburg Confession's section on Confession.
Should every compulsive sinner start his own church, or was Luther somehow special?
We are all compulsive sinners, according to Romans 7. Indeed, the teaching of simul justus et peccator ("simultaneously justified and sinner", or sometimes condensed to "justified sinner") is one of Lutheranisms doctrinal gifts to Christendom; and, like some other gifts, one that is misuderstood both by extreme Catholics who have trouble grasping the full import of Justification and by extreme Calvanists/fundamentalists who have trouble grasping that the truly redeemed can ever sin.
Luther was somehow special in that he enjoyed the protection of a German Prince--otherwise he would have met the same fate as John Huss.
I don't understand what you are trying to say.
Good points . . .
Though I don’t think the ship is all that tightly ran . . . on the whole.
Hmmn... but the Church of Rome, as founded by Leo IX in AD 1054, has erroneously departed from the Gospel of Christ. Specifically, the novelties of salvation by works and the sacrifice of the mass twist the Gospel almost beyond recognition.
What an absolutely HORRIFIC history.
What is it with this RC edifice obsession with
Only the LDS seem more obsessed with the dead/graduated!
I don't know what that is.
I'm talking about the Catholic Church.
You have completely misunderstood, and/or misrepresented, the evangelical position on the "literal" interpretation of Scripture. Evangelicals adhere to the historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture: Scripture taken in its historical context, with attention paid specifically to the literally genre of any given passage: poetry is interpreted differently from historical narrative, etc. You have created a straw man argument that does not apply to what evangelicals actually believe. Further, dispensational theology believes you must distinguish in the way in which God rules in this world or the economy by which He mediates His rule in this world at different points in time.
... counters secularism because it shows a moral social model independent of it and indifferent to the secular world.
Except that there is nothing biblical about the monastic life...and there is no way that a "secular" society will see it as a model for themselves. It is viewed by the secular world as an aberration, and certainly of no value whatsoever to them.
Only reference to priests is in chapter 13, and the subject is prophets being treated as "high-priests".
I think you're assuming that it is addressed to priests but the content and context doesn't support that assumption.
So, it's an instruction as to how to baptize but it's not specifically directed to priests.
Looks like a difference to me. Then: any Christian could baptize. Now: Roman Catholic priest baptizes.